I wonder whether this could be a good early human application for Neurallink — with sufficient direct brain I/O we could interact with these patients in a metaverse setting!
So The Matrix but run by Zuckerberg instead of the machines? I'm having a hard time deciding which would be worse.
Before then, it was some fictional concept in a dystopian sci-fi novel. Now it's got Facebook--I mean Meta--all over it. So it's reasonable to bring this up when someone imagines the potential of neuralinking someone to the metaverse. It almost feels like the suggestion is making Zuckerberg's dream come true for him.
0. https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&q=...
I feel like the complexity behind this idea is often lost in optimism about our current capabilities.
While Neuralink and other brain/computer interfaces should be developed (ideally in a non-invasive mode of operation) and have a wide range of possible uses in the future, i think that we're still decades if not centuries away from something like a "metaverse" of any kind.
Instead, currently instead of a simulated room (a la VRChat), it would probably be more like getting direct access to the spindles of a HDD and not really knowing much about the file system or the data on the drive, being able to write/read some arbitrary data and hope for the best.
If it were at all viable at the moment, you could probably communicate in a basic manner (e.g. morse code or yes/no) with someone who cannot utilize their muscles for whatever reason. This is still immensely useful, for example, in the cases as described in the article, but is still far off from immersive environments.
Or maybe my knowledge is out of date and there is promising research out there? Has anyone directly streamed video/3D environments or even pictures to someone's brain, maybe through the optical nerve? What about creating body sensations or interacting with one's sense of balance, or even smell/hearing?
It's probably still a viable approach, it's just that care should be taken to not disrupt the functionality of one's eyes whilst adding the necessary implant, which may or may not be doable, depending on the method.
Of course, the point about scar tissue is also a valid one.
The biggest problem is neural rewiring as response to the unnatural stimulus and ethics comitees.
Isn't Neurallink basically a fantasy at this point? In a similar vein, I can think of a lot of good early human applications for a teleporter as well.
Neurallink is a fantasy in terms of form factor, ease of use, and that specific teams ability to make something like this. The underlying technology exists but probably isn’t going to be ready for an application like this.
Even using the basics of left arm and right arm broadly you can establish communication by using dichotomous questioning.
I consider Elon Musk too unstable and unethical sociopath to trust that Neuralink would be used to better mankind, not just Elon Musk. The dude wants power.
A neural link could be thousands of times worse in terms of privacy invasion, addiction, and “rabbit hole effect” brainwashing than anything we have now. Phones and home assistants are invasive but they are not merging with our biology. One can put them down or disconnect them.
History has shown that overt malice or ill intent is not required for things to go evil either. All you need is perverse economic incentives and/or feedback loops leading to destructive emergent behaviors.
So no, absolutely not.
And in an off-line setting. But sadly, we're going a different route, into consumer-hostile XaaS model. With medical equipment, too.